EDMONTON - Quebec’s higher-education summit next week is crucial not just to Quebec but to Canada, for reasons that transcend the topic of post-secondary education. It’s vital that the discussion reflects some realities, even if they are unpalatable to the protagonists.

Over a period of 25 years before retiring in 2008, I worked with senior administrators at three major Canadian universities, and at a number of student associations — ending with 17 years as general manager of the University of Alberta Students’ Union. In recognition of the fact that all parties tend to emphasize financial information that reflects their own interests, I have since compiled a comprehensive, multi-year database on funding and spending at Canada’s 25 largest universities, using data from official sources, primarily the universities themselves.

I’d like to offer some thoughts on the current debate, emphasizing how Quebec compares with the rest of Canada.

The financial reality:

In 2009-10, general operating revenue averaged $20,083 per student in the universities in the rest of Canada, but only $16,047 in the Quebec schools. Quebec’s policy of reduced reliance on student fees is clearly apparent here. While the ROC universities received an average of $5,939 per student from credit-course tuition fees, the Quebec universities received just $2,781.

This places added responsibility on the Quebec government to ensure that provincial funding fills the resultant gap, but that’s not happening. Per-student provincial operating grants averaged $10,833 in the ROC schools, but only slightly higher in the Quebec schools — $10,924.

We see the troubling picture becoming clearer on the spending side. This is where the financial reality starts to bite as an educational reality: Quebec’s universities are losing ground, because income shortfalls inevitably end up in the classroom.

The two key spending areas at universities are instruction and non-sponsored research (that is, research financed by the universities, not by outside sources). These are where the teaching happens and quality education is built.

According to the annual reports of the Canadian Association of University Business Officers that I use for my comparisons, expenditures in these two areas by Quebec schools averaged $9,603 per student in 2009-10, while the average at their ROC counterparts was 14 per cent higher, at $10,990. Funding cuts like those that the Quebec government announced last fall can only worsen this disparity.

While funding is certainly a major issue, this cannot detract from the fact that the universities must also look in the mirror, because an ethical reality sits on their shoulders. It involves the obligation to deliver the best education possible, given the funding constraints. How well have Quebec’s universities done?

There are many behind-the-scenes costs involved in running a modern university, but administrators should never forget that each dollar spent outside the classroom cannot be spent inside it.

The Quebec schools spent much more in some areas compared with their peers, yet in other areas they spent much less. For example, Quebec schools devoted more to their libraries (5.2 per cent of general operating expenditures vs. 4.6 per cent in ROC universities), but far less to student services (5.5 per cent vs. 10.3 per cent), and substantially more to central administration (13.8 per cent vs. 10.8 per cent).

The low level of spending on student services could prove to be particularly problematic, with student stress levels running at all-time highs.

These numbers are averages, and some universities perform better than others. But when it comes to administration, some Quebec schools have not only mirrored the frustrating national trend for universities to spend more and more on their central bureaucracies; they’ve taken it to new levels.

Of the six Canadian universities that in 2009-10 spent the most on central administration (spending covered by the combined total of the sub-categories “administration and general” and “external relations” under the larger category of “general operating” budget items according to the way the Canadian Association of University Business Officers tracks expenditures), four were from Quebec: the Université de Sherbrooke (21 per cent); Concordia University (16.6 per cent); McGill University (15.4 per cent); and the Université du Québec à Montréal (14 per cent).

Quebec’s summit on higher education must find solutions, but it’s not a promising sign that much of the advance posturing has been about who should pay more, students or the province, when the universities need both their students and the government to pay more, and when the universities themselves must better meet their own responsibilities.

The challenge is magnified by the fact that Quebec’s education debate is intertwined with a political debate. That heightens the importance of reflecting on some political realities.

The sovereignty ideal, to which the current governing party in Quebec and many of the most vocal students subscribe, contains a fundamental contradiction. While low-cost social services and tuition may be a cornerstone of the ideal, they are arguably only sustainable within Confederation; remove the equalization payments that Quebec receives from the rest of Canada and free (or even low) tuition is almost certainly unaffordable, especially when the province is already falling behind in post-secondary-education funding and facing brutally expensive health-care and infrastructure challenges. Even avowed separatists must contemplate the distinct possibility that much of what makes a sovereign Quebec attractive to them might well be unsustainable if separation from Canada actually happens.

But even within Confederation, there are political realities to consider. Quebecers of all leanings must surely understand the frustration in the rest of Canada at the fact that the equalization payments Quebec receives from the federal government allow it to do things like subsidize tuition fees to far lower levels than those being paid by students in the wealthier provinces that are the source of those equalization payments. That’s not an anti-Quebec sentiment, just an understandable perspective.

There must be many Parti Québécois MNAs and supporters who realize that underfunding post-secondary education is not the route to a dream but a blueprint for mediocrity. Students must decide whether they want a cheap education or a good education, because a demand for both may well be irreconcilable. University administrators must remember that they have a duty to provide the best education they can with the funds available; some of their past resource-allocation decisions have paid scant regard to that duty. Ordinary Quebecers must ponder how much they’re willing to pay in taxes to support post-secondary education.

This isn’t an entirely vexing picture. It is of great credit to Quebec that a few of its universities, McGill in particular, have achieved global recognition despite facing deeper funding challenges than most of their peers. That’s a tribute to some outstanding academics, talented students, and (administration costs aside) capable administrators; but they can’t fight reality forever.

Quebec’s future hinges on this debate. Everyone must yield ground if progress is to be made. Self-honesty will be essential.

Before retiring in 2008, W.D. Smith of Edmonton worked for 25 years with senior administrators at three major Canadian universities and a number of student associations, ending with 17 years as general manager of the University of Alberta Students’ Union.

Where the numbers come from

The financial numbers in this analysis are taken from annual reports published by the Canadian Association of University Business Officers. Enrolment data come from universities, or associations reporting on their behalf. This analysis covers Canada’s 25 largest universities, as measured by total revenue, of which six are in Quebec. While 2010-11 data were available for universities in the rest of Canada at the writing of this article, Quebec universities still had not reported for that academic year; so 2009-10 numbers are used throughout.

Comments

We encourage all readers to share their views on our articles and blog posts. We are committed to maintaining a lively but civil forum for discussion, so we ask you to avoid personal attacks, and please keep your comments relevant and respectful. If you encounter a comment that is abusive, click the "X" in the upper right corner of the comment box to report spam or abuse. We are using Facebook commenting. Visit our FAQ page for more information.

Almost Done!

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.

Postmedia wants to improve your reading experience as well as share the best deals and promotions from our advertisers with you. The information below will be used to optimize the content and make ads across the network more relevant to you. You can always change the information you share with us by editing your profile.

By clicking "Create Account", I hearby grant permission to Postmedia to use my account information to create my account.

I also accept and agree to be bound by Postmedia's Terms and Conditions with respect to my use of the Site and I have read and understand Postmedia's Privacy Statement. I consent to the collection, use, maintenance, and disclosure of my information in accordance with the Postmedia's Privacy Policy.